392:, but stated that the distinction between the two did not disappear. The court also ruled that when military targets were concentrated in a comparatively small area, and where defense installations against air raids were very strong, that when the destruction of non-military objectives was small in proportion to the large military interests, or necessity, such destruction was lawful. Thus, because of the immense power of the atom bombs, and the distance from enemy land forces, the atomic bombings of both Hiroshima and Nagasaki "was an illegal act of hostilities under international law as it existed at that time, as an indiscriminate bombardment of undefended cities".
524:
near or in densely populated areas and endeavor to remove civilians from the vicinity of military objectives. Failure to do so would cause a higher civilian death toll resulting from bombardment by the attacking force and the defenders would be held responsible, even criminally liable, for these deaths. This issue was addressed because drafters of
Protocol I pointed out historical examples such as Japan in World War II who often dispersed legitimate military and industrial targets (almost two-thirds of production was from small factories of thirty or fewer persons or in wooden homes, which were clustered around the factories) throughout
207:
566:. The court ruled that "here is in neither customary nor international law any comprehensive and universal prohibition of the threat or use of nuclear weapons." However, by a split vote, it also found that "he threat or use of nuclear weapons would generally be contrary to the rules of international law applicable in armed conflict." The Court stated that it could not definitively conclude whether the threat or use of nuclear weapons would be lawful or unlawful in an extreme circumstance of self-defense, in which the very survival of the state would be at stake.
136:
239:
excessive civilian casualties and appropriate warning. This draft convention makes the standard of being undefended quite high – any military units or anti-aircraft within the radius qualifies a town as defended. This convention, like the 1923 draft, was not ratified – nor even close to ratification – when hostilities broke out in Europe in 1939. While the two conventions offer a guideline to what the belligerent powers were considering before the war, neither of these documents came to be legally binding.
89:. In the Hague Convention of 1907, two treaties have a direct bearing on the issue of bombardment. These are "Laws of War: Laws and Customs of War on Land (Hague IV); 18 October 1907" and "Laws of War: Bombardment by Naval Forces in Time of War (Hague IX); 18 October 1907". It is significant that there is a different treaty which should be invoked for bombardment of land by land (Hague IV) and of land by sea (Hague IX). Hague IV, which reaffirmed and updated Hague II (1899), contains the following clauses:
469:
348:
388:
immediate vicinity of the operations of land forces and that only targeted aerial bombardment of military installations was permitted further from the front. It also ruled the incidental death of civilians and the destruction of civilian property during targeted aerial bombardment was not unlawful. The court acknowledged that the concept of a military objective was enlarged under conditions of
72:: An attack or action must be intended to help in the military defeat of the enemy; it must be an attack on a military objective, and the harm caused to protected civilians or civilian property must be proportional and not excessive in relation to the concrete and direct military advantage anticipated.
80:
Before and during World War II (1939–1945), international law relating to aerial bombardment rested on the treaties of 1864, 1899, and 1907, which constituted the definition of most of the laws of war at that time – which, despite repeated diplomatic attempts, was not updated in the immediate run-up
523:
of civilians and civilian objects, even if the area contained military objectives, and the attacking force must take precautions and steps to spare the lives of civilians and civilian objects as possible. However, forces occupying near densely populated areas must avoid locating military objectives
411:
In examining these events in the light of international humanitarian law, it should be borne in mind that during the Second World War there was no agreement, treaty, convention or any other instrument governing the protection of the civilian population or civilian property, as the
Conventions then
99:
Article 27: In sieges and bombardments all necessary steps must be taken to spare, as far as possible, buildings dedicated to religion, art, science, or charitable purposes, historic monuments, hospitals, and places where the sick and wounded are collected, provided they are not being used at the
447:
A fair reading of the , for example, leaves the objective observer unable to answer with confidence whether the United States was guilty of war crimes for its aerial bombing campaigns over
Germany and Japan in World War II. Indeed, if anything, a straightforward reading of the language probably
238:
to pass a resolution that called for the protection of civilian populations against bombardment from the air. In response to the resolution passed by the League of
Nations, a draft convention in Amsterdam of 1938 would have provided specific definitions of what constituted an "undefended" town,
387:
the Court drew a distinction between "Targeted Aerial
Bombardment" and indiscriminate area bombardment (which the court called "Blind Aerial Bombardment"), and also a distinction between a defended and an undefended city. The court ruled that blind aerial bombardment was permitted only in the
124:
in 1907 did adopt a "Declaration
Prohibiting the Discharge of Projectiles and Explosives from Balloons" on 18 October 1907. It stated: "The Contracting Powers agree to prohibit, for a period extending to the close of the Third Peace Conference, the discharge of projectiles and explosives from
194:
argues that "if international law is not enforced, persistent violations can conceivably be adopted as customary practice, permitting conduct that was once prohibited." Even if the Greco-German arbitration tribunal findings had established the rules for aerial bombardment, by 1945, the
174:. The draft contained a number of articles which would have directly affected how militaries used aerial bombardment and defended against it: articles 18, 22 and 24. The law was, however, never adopted in legally binding form as all major powers criticized it as being unrealistic.
562:
305:(1945–1946). Article 6(b) of the Charter thus condemned the "wanton destruction of cities, towns or villages, or devastation not justified by military necessity" and classified it as a violation of the laws or customs of war, therefore, making it a
528:
in many of its cities either with the sole purpose of preventing enemy forces from bombing these targets or using its civilian casualties caused by enemy bombardment as propaganda value against the enemy. This move made Japan vulnerable to
116:
prohibited the bombardment of undefended places, there was no international prohibition against indiscriminate bombardment of non-combatants in defended places, a shortcoming in the rules that was greatly exacerbated by aerial bombardment.
548:
However, Protocol I also states that locating military objectives near civilians "shall not release the
Parties to the conflict from their legal obligations with respect to the civilian population and civilians." (Article 51, Para 8)
511:
attempted to erect some legal defenses for civilians in time of war, the bulk of the Fourth
Convention devoted to explicating civilian rights in occupied territories, and no explicit attention is paid to the problems of bombardment.
246:, President of the then neutral United States, the major European powers, including Britain and Germany, agreed not to bomb civilian targets outside combat zones: Britain agreeing provided that the other powers also refrained. (see
125:
balloons or by other new methods of a similar nature." The foreshadowed "Third Peace
Conference" never took place, and the Declaration remains in force. The United Kingdom and the United States ratified the Declaration.
1231:
1216:
1201:
1183:
432:
332:
prohibiting illegal conducts of aerial warfare in World War II, the indiscriminate bombing of enemy cities was excluded from the category of war crimes at the
Nuremberg and Tokyo Trials, therefore, no
761:
178:
454:, these provisions seem to imply that the United States would have been guilty of a war crime for dropping atomic bombs on Hiroshima and Nagasaki. This is intolerable and unacceptable.
786:
This Conference never having met, the Declaration of 1907 is still formally in force today. Of the great Powers only Great Britain and the United States ratified the Declaration.
250:). However, this was not honored, as belligerents of both sides in the war adopted a policy of indiscriminate bombing of enemy cities. Throughout World War II, cities like
97:
Article 26: The officer in command of an attacking force must, before commencing a bombardment, except in cases of assault, do all in his power to warn the authorities.
1249:
104:
It is the duty of the besieged to indicate the presence of such buildings or places by distinctive and visible signs, which shall be notified to the enemy beforehand.
39:
These restraints on aerial warfare are covered by the general laws of war, because unlike war on land and at sea—which are specifically covered by rules such as the
1429:
1468:
721:
958:"COLLATERAL DAMAGE ON THE 21ST CENTURY BATTLEFIELD: ENEMY EXPLOITATION OF THE LAW OF ARMED CONFLICT, AND THE STRUGGLE FOR A MORAL HIGH GROUND", Volume 56, 2005
247:
395:
Not all governments and scholars of international law agree with the analysis and conclusions of the Shimoda review, because it was not based on positive
436:
181:
of 1927–1930 arguably established the subordination of the law of air warfare to the law of ground warfare. It found that the 1907 Hague Convention on
344:
explain that: "By leaving out morale bombing and other attacks on civilians unchallenged, the Tribunal conferred legal legitimacy on such practices."
1430:"Treaties, States parties, and Commentaries – Additional Protocol (I) to the Geneva Conventions, 1977 – 51 – Protection of the civilian population"
440:
310:
68:
1489:"Collateral Damage on the 21st century battlefield: Enemy exploitation of the law of armed conflict, and the struggle for a moral high ground".
951:"Collateral Damage on the 21st century battlefield: Enemy exploitation of the law of armed conflict, and the struggle for a moral high ground".
140:
640:
400:
93:
Article 25: The attack or bombardment, by whatever means, of towns, villages, dwellings, or buildings which are undefended is prohibited.
1228:
1213:
1198:
1180:
340:
received no notice of records of trial concerning the illegal conduct of air warfare. Chris Jochnick and Roger Normand in their article
1520:
Commentary on the Declaration (XIV) Prohibiting the Discharge of Projectiles and Explosives from Balloons. The Hague, 18 October 1907.
884:
590:
507:
would come into force, in no small part, because of a general reaction against the practices of the Second World War. Although the
1355:
1315:
1286:
1122:
1094:
1065:
999:
914:
645:
290:
suffered aerial bombardment, causing untold numbers of destroyed buildings and the deaths of tens of thousands of civilians.
1480:
337:
167:
1495:
1484:, May 2006. Bibliographer, Muir S. Fairchild Research Information Center Maxwell (United States) Air Force Base, Alabama.
1445:
957:
361:
1465:
1246:
718:
279:
275:
293:
After World War II, the massive destruction of non-combatant targets inflicted during the war prompted the victorious
51:, which contain pertinent restrictions, prohibitions and guidelines—there are no treaties specific to aerial warfare.
1413:
1389:
1151:
1028:
829:
774:"Declaration (XIV) Prohibiting the Discharge of Projectiles and Explosives from Balloons. The Hague, 18 October 1907"
255:
762:
Declaration (XIV) Prohibiting the Discharge of Projectiles and Explosives from Balloons. The Hague, 18 October 1907.
1257:", published while he was U.S. Undersecretary of State for Arms Control and International Security, Winter 2001.
1377:
553:
396:
329:
29:
1043:
880:
203:
had ignored the preliminary bombardment procedures that the Greco-German arbitration tribunal had recognized.
162:
and aircraft indiscriminately dropped bombs on cities in Britain and France. These nations, fighting against
773:
185:
applied to the German attacks in Greece during World War I: This concerned both Article 25 and Article 26.
1020:
326:
85:
because it was the last treaty ratified before 1939 which specified the laws of war regarding the use of
1086:
1044:
Draft Convention for the Protection of Civilian Populations Against New Engines of War. Amsterdam, 1938
991:
322:
976:, Unanimous resolution of the League of Nations Assembly, 30 September 1938, verified 26 February 2005
371:
judgement, the Court drew several distinctions which were pertinent to both conventional and atomic
1114:
575:
508:
231:
128:
With the rise of aerial warfare, non-combatants became extremely vulnerable and inevitably became
82:
40:
1544:
1481:
List of documents and web links relating to the law of armed conflict in air and space operations
1274:
25:
1381:
1371:
1347:
1336:
1278:
1268:
294:
287:
662:
412:
in force dealt only with the protection of the wounded and the sick on the battlefield and in
520:
271:
243:
19:
929:
206:
1491:
953:
844:
Tucker C. Spencer, Priscilla Mary Roberts. "World War I: A Student Encyclopedia". page 45.
534:
251:
189:
8:
1549:
1343:
1331:
1143:
821:
699:
Laws of War: Bombardment by Naval Forces in Time of War (Hague IX); October 18, 1907
219:
482:
Please help update this article to reflect recent events or newly available information.
1307:
1247:
The Risks and Weaknesses of the International Criminal Court from America's Perspective
906:
504:
355:
In 1963 the atomic bombings of Hiroshima and Nagasaki became the subject of a Japanese
223:
56:
48:
741:
698:
678:
1409:
1385:
1351:
1311:
1282:
1147:
1118:
1090:
1061:
1024:
995:
910:
903:
The Legitimate Use of Military Force (Justice, International Law and Global Security)
825:
776:. Treaties, States Parties and Commentaries. International Cimmittee of the Red Cross
600:
519:
was adopted as an amendment to the Geneva Conventions, prohibiting the deliberate or
372:
336:
officers and leaders were prosecuted for authorizing this practice. Furthermore, the
298:
235:
227:
155:
129:
121:
62:
33:
862:
54:
To be legal, aerial operations must comply with the principles of humanitarian law:
802:
654:
605:
580:
557:
542:
530:
421:
302:
283:
1304:
Rockets from Gaza: Harm to Civilians from Palestinian Armed Groups' Rocket Attacks
881:
Rules concerning the Control of Wireless Telegraphy in Time of War and Air Warfare
313:
of 1946–1948 to try Japanese military and civilian leaders in accordance with the
230:
of 1936–1939 and the Japanese aerial attacks on crowded Chinese cities during the
1518:
1472:
1449:
1253:
937:
749:
725:
706:
686:
356:
259:
1531:– Commentary on the early conventions including details not yet in this article.
973:
135:
933:
745:
702:
682:
610:
585:
428:
267:
163:
1442:
974:
Protection of Civilian Populations Against Bombing From the Air in Case of War
930:
Laws of War: Laws and Customs of War on Land (Hague IV); October 18, 1907
658:
1538:
538:
417:
413:
367:
314:
433:
Under Secretary of State for Arms Control and International Security Affairs
742:
Laws of War: Laws and Customs of War on Land (Hague II); July 29, 1899
595:
200:
196:
170:). A few years after World War I, a draft convention was proposed in 1923:
1140:
The International Law of War:Transnational Coercion and World Public Order
500:
333:
318:
151:
86:
32:
by protecting the victims of the conflict and refraining from attacks on
1111:
State Crime: Current Perspectives (Critical Issues in Crime and Society)
679:
Laws of War: Laws and Customs of War on Land (Hague IV); 18 October 1907
1464:
Francisco Javier Guisández Gómez, (a colonel in the Spanish Air Force)
525:
516:
450:
301:
of August 1945 to establish the procedures and laws for conducting the
44:
351:
Mushroom cloud from the atomic explosion over Nagasaki (9 August 1945)
132:
in such warfare – potentially on a much larger scale than previously.
845:
545:
or atomic bombs, with the deaths of 381,000–500,000 Japanese people.
439:(2005–2006)), explained in 2001 why the USA should not adhere to the
389:
342:
The Legitimation of Violence 1: A Critical History of the Laws of War
306:
263:
159:
1232:
I. Evaluation of the act of bombing according to international law
1217:
I. Evaluation of the act of bombing according to international law
1202:
I. Evaluation of the act of bombing according to international law
1184:
I. Evaluation of the act of bombing according to international law
818:
Non-Combatant Immunity As a Norm of International Humanitarian Law
404:
499:
In the post war environment, a series of treaties governing the
248:
the policy on strategic bombing at the start of the World War II
347:
211:
144:
888:
448:
indicates that the court would find the United States guilty.
1475:
International Review of the Red Cross no 323, p. 347–363
242:
At the start of World War II in 1939, following an appeal by
1170:. International Law Association of Japan. 1994. p. 147.
81:
to World War II. The most relevant of these treaties is the
234:
in 1937–38 attracted worldwide condemnation, prompting the
732:
p. 360. "the analogy between land and aerial bombardment".
1083:
Necessity, Proportionality and the Use of Force by States
317:(January 1946) for illegal conducts committed during the
799:
International Dimensions of Humanitarian Law, Volume 1
1443:
ICJ: Legality of the threat or use of nuclear weapons
1408:. Eleven International Publishing. 2006. p. 72.
988:
The Protection of Cultural Property in Armed Conflict
166:
in the war, retaliated with their own air-raids (see
420:, the laws and customs of war and the protection of
1330:
1168:
The Japanese Annual of International Law: Volume 36
437:
U.S. Permanent Representative to the United Nations
1335:
815:
1266:
985:
1536:
1055:
900:
563:Legality of the Threat Or Use of Nuclear Weapons
441:Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court
1301:
1137:
1014:
541:which destroyed 69 Japanese cities with either
458:
381:IX – Bombardment by Naval Forces in Time of War
114:IX – Bombardment by Naval Forces in Time of War
75:
1373:History of World War II: Victory and Aftermath
1338:The Library of Congress World War II Companion
1229:Wikisource:Ryuichi Shimoda et al. v. The State
1214:Wikisource:Ryuichi Shimoda et al. v. The State
1199:Wikisource:Ryuichi Shimoda et al. v. The State
1181:Wikisource:Ryuichi Shimoda et al. v. The State
1037:
1080:
385:Hague Draft Rules of Air Warfare of 1922–1923
321:of 1941–1945. However, due to the absence of
1406:The Law of Air Warfare – Contemporary Issues
719:International Review of the Red Cross no 323
874:
401:International Institute of Humanitarian Law
309:. This provision was similarly used at the
375:. Relying on the Hague Convention of 1907
889:section on international humanitarian law
674:
672:
399:. Colonel Javier Guisández Gómez, at the
297:to address the issue when developing the
885:International Committee of the Red Cross
851:
639:Gómez, Javier Guisández (20 June 1998).
591:Civilian casualties of strategic bombing
377:IV – The Laws and Customs of War on Land
346:
205:
134:
110:IV – The Laws and Customs of War on Land
634:
632:
630:
628:
626:
1537:
1194:
1192:
969:
967:
735:
692:
689:, entered into force: 26 January 1910.
669:
1436:
940:, entered into force: 26 January 1910
901:Howard M. Hensel (19 February 2008).
712:
646:International Review of the Red Cross
638:
503:were adopted starting in 1949. These
210:German Heinkel He 111 planes bombing
183:"The Laws and Customs of War on Land"
1516:
1270:Moral Principles and Nuclear Weapons
1267:Douglas P. Lackey (1 January 1984).
623:
462:
338:United Nations War Crimes Commission
188:Jefferson Reynolds in an article in
168:Strategic bombing during World War I
108:Although the 1907 Hague Conventions
1189:
964:
816:Judith Gail Gardam (8 April 1993).
752:, entry into force 4 September 1900
362:Ryuichi Shimoda et al. v. The State
13:
1510:
1302:Bill Van Esveld (17 August 2009).
1222:
1207:
1174:
1138:Myres McDouglas (18 August 1994).
14:
1561:
1117:. 28 September 2010. p. 90.
986:Roger O'Keefe (15 January 2007).
870:this convention was never adopted
179:Greco-German arbitration tribunal
154:(1914-1918) saw the first use of
467:
1422:
1398:
1364:
1324:
1295:
1260:
1237:
1160:
1131:
1103:
1074:
1060:. MSU Press. pp. 121–125.
1049:
1008:
979:
943:
923:
894:
838:
729:
1506:Editions Pedone, Paris, (1983)
1466:ICRC: "The Law of Air Warfare"
1378:Marshall Cavendish Corporation
1081:Judith Gardam (21 July 2011).
863:The Hague Rules of Air Warfare
809:
791:
766:
755:
554:International Court of Justice
397:international humanitarian law
330:international humanitarian law
172:The Hague Rules of Air Warfare
30:international humanitarian law
1:
1458:
1058:Truman and the Hiroshima Cult
24:Air warfare must comply with
537:(USAAF) adopted a policy of
459:International law since 1945
226:in Spain in 1937 during the
76:International law up to 1945
7:
1504:Le droit des conflits armés
1046:, verified 26 February 2005
1021:Manchester University Press
569:
100:time for military purposes.
10:
1566:
1087:Cambridge University Press
992:Cambridge University Press
17:
1056:Robert P. Newman (2011).
891:verified 26 February 2005
728:cites: Charles Rousseau,
659:10.1017/S0020860400091075
476:This article needs to be
1275:Rowman & Littlefield
1115:Rutgers University Press
1015:A. P. V. Rogers (1996).
641:"The Law of Air Warfare"
616:
576:Aerial bombing of cities
509:Fourth Geneva Convention
232:Second Sino-Japanese War
191:The Air Force Law Review
83:Hague Convention of 1907
1487:Jefferson D. Reynolds.
949:Jefferson D. Reynolds.
288:Hiroshima, and Nagasaki
218:The German bombings of
122:Second Hague Conference
26:laws and customs of war
1471:6 January 2010 at the
1017:Law on the Battlefield
865:, 1922–12 to 1923–02,
724:6 January 2010 at the
456:
426:
352:
215:
164:Germany and its allies
148:
106:
1517:ICRC (27 June 2012),
744:, available from the
701:, available from the
521:indiscriminate attack
445:
409:
350:
244:Franklin D. Roosevelt
209:
138:
120:The attendees of the
91:
41:1907 Hague Convention
20:Indiscriminate attack
1499:(PDF) pp. 4–108
1492:Air Force Law Review
1344:Simon & Schuster
954:Air Force Law Review
805:. 1988. p. 115.
560:in July 1996 on the
535:U.S. Army Air Forces
1448:22 May 2014 at the
1332:Library of Congress
1252:3 June 2016 at the
932:available from the
822:Springer Publishing
681:available from the
1502:Charles Rousseau,
1478:Joan T. Phillips.
1334:(2 October 2007).
1308:Human Rights Watch
505:Geneva Conventions
373:aerial bombardment
353:
216:
149:
130:collateral targets
57:military necessity
49:Geneva Conventions
47:additional to the
1357:978-0-7432-5219-5
1317:978-1-56432-523-5
1288:978-0-8476-7116-8
1124:978-0-8135-4901-9
1096:978-0-521-17349-0
1067:978-0-87013-940-6
1001:978-0-521-86797-9
961:(PDF) Page 57/58.
916:978-92-3-102371-2
665:on 25 April 2013.
601:Strategic bombing
497:
496:
299:Nuremberg Charter
236:League of Nations
228:Spanish Civil War
156:strategic bombing
34:protected persons
1557:
1530:
1529:
1527:
1452:
1440:
1434:
1433:
1426:
1420:
1419:
1402:
1396:
1395:
1380:. 2005. p.
1368:
1362:
1361:
1341:
1328:
1322:
1321:
1299:
1293:
1292:
1264:
1258:
1241:
1235:
1226:
1220:
1211:
1205:
1196:
1187:
1178:
1172:
1171:
1164:
1158:
1157:
1135:
1129:
1128:
1107:
1101:
1100:
1078:
1072:
1071:
1053:
1047:
1041:
1035:
1034:
1012:
1006:
1005:
983:
977:
971:
962:
947:
941:
927:
921:
920:
898:
892:
878:
866:
858:
849:
842:
836:
835:
813:
807:
806:
803:Brill Publishers
795:
789:
788:
783:
781:
770:
764:
759:
753:
739:
733:
716:
710:
696:
690:
676:
667:
666:
661:. Archived from
636:
606:Tactical bombing
581:Area bombardment
558:advisory opinion
543:incendiary bombs
531:area bombardment
492:
489:
483:
471:
470:
463:
435:(2001–2005) and
422:prisoners of war
303:Nuremberg trials
214:(September 1939)
141:Schütte Lanz SL2
1565:
1564:
1560:
1559:
1558:
1556:
1555:
1554:
1535:
1534:
1525:
1523:
1513:
1511:Further reading
1496:Volume 56, 2005
1473:Wayback Machine
1461:
1456:
1455:
1450:Wayback Machine
1441:
1437:
1428:
1427:
1423:
1416:
1404:
1403:
1399:
1392:
1370:
1369:
1365:
1358:
1329:
1325:
1318:
1300:
1296:
1289:
1265:
1261:
1254:Wayback Machine
1242:
1238:
1227:
1223:
1212:
1208:
1197:
1190:
1179:
1175:
1166:
1165:
1161:
1154:
1146:. p. 641.
1136:
1132:
1125:
1109:
1108:
1104:
1097:
1089:. p. 130.
1079:
1075:
1068:
1054:
1050:
1042:
1038:
1031:
1013:
1009:
1002:
984:
980:
972:
965:
948:
944:
938:Yale Law School
928:
924:
917:
909:. p. 194.
899:
895:
879:
875:
861:
852:
843:
839:
832:
814:
810:
797:
796:
792:
779:
777:
772:
771:
767:
760:
756:
750:Yale Law School
740:
736:
726:Wayback Machine
717:
713:
707:Yale Law School
697:
693:
687:Yale Law School
677:
670:
653:(323): 347–63.
637:
624:
619:
572:
493:
487:
484:
481:
472:
468:
461:
357:judicial review
139:German airship
101:
98:
94:
78:
69:proportionality
22:
12:
11:
5:
1563:
1553:
1552:
1547:
1545:Aerial bombing
1533:
1532:
1512:
1509:
1508:
1507:
1500:
1485:
1476:
1460:
1457:
1454:
1453:
1435:
1421:
1414:
1397:
1390:
1363:
1356:
1323:
1316:
1310:. p. 26.
1294:
1287:
1259:
1236:
1234:: Paragraph 8.
1221:
1206:
1204:: Paragraph 10
1188:
1173:
1159:
1152:
1130:
1123:
1102:
1095:
1073:
1066:
1048:
1036:
1029:
1023:. p. 53.
1007:
1000:
994:. p. 50.
978:
963:
942:
934:Avalon Project
922:
915:
893:
873:
850:
837:
830:
824:. p. 21.
808:
790:
765:
754:
746:Avalon Project
734:
711:
703:Avalon Project
691:
683:Avalon Project
668:
621:
620:
618:
615:
614:
613:
611:Terror bombing
608:
603:
598:
593:
588:
586:Carpet bombing
583:
578:
571:
568:
495:
494:
475:
473:
466:
460:
457:
429:John R. Bolton
418:hospital ships
407:, points out:
77:
74:
9:
6:
4:
3:
2:
1562:
1551:
1548:
1546:
1543:
1542:
1540:
1522:
1521:
1515:
1514:
1505:
1501:
1498:
1497:
1493:
1490:
1486:
1483:
1482:
1477:
1474:
1470:
1467:
1463:
1462:
1451:
1447:
1444:
1439:
1431:
1425:
1417:
1415:90-77596-14-3
1411:
1407:
1401:
1393:
1391:0-7614-7482-X
1387:
1383:
1379:
1375:
1374:
1367:
1359:
1353:
1349:
1345:
1340:
1339:
1333:
1327:
1319:
1313:
1309:
1305:
1298:
1290:
1284:
1280:
1276:
1272:
1271:
1263:
1256:
1255:
1251:
1248:
1243:John Bolton:
1240:
1233:
1230:
1225:
1219:: Paragraph 9
1218:
1215:
1210:
1203:
1200:
1195:
1193:
1186:: Paragraph 6
1185:
1182:
1177:
1169:
1163:
1155:
1153:0-7923-2584-2
1149:
1145:
1141:
1134:
1126:
1120:
1116:
1112:
1106:
1098:
1092:
1088:
1084:
1077:
1069:
1063:
1059:
1052:
1045:
1040:
1032:
1030:0-7190-4785-4
1026:
1022:
1018:
1011:
1003:
997:
993:
989:
982:
975:
970:
968:
960:
959:
955:
952:
946:
939:
935:
931:
926:
918:
912:
908:
904:
897:
890:
886:
882:
877:
871:
868:
867:
864:
857:
856:
847:
841:
833:
831:0-7923-2245-2
827:
823:
819:
812:
804:
800:
794:
787:
775:
769:
763:
758:
751:
747:
743:
738:
731:
727:
723:
720:
715:
708:
704:
700:
695:
688:
684:
680:
675:
673:
664:
660:
656:
652:
648:
647:
642:
635:
633:
631:
629:
627:
622:
612:
609:
607:
604:
602:
599:
597:
594:
592:
589:
587:
584:
582:
579:
577:
574:
573:
567:
565:
564:
559:
555:
550:
546:
544:
540:
539:carpetbombing
536:
532:
527:
522:
518:
513:
510:
506:
502:
491:
488:December 2020
479:
474:
465:
464:
455:
453:
452:
444:
442:
438:
434:
430:
425:
423:
419:
415:
414:naval warfare
408:
406:
402:
398:
393:
391:
386:
382:
378:
374:
370:
369:
368:obiter dictum
364:
363:
358:
349:
345:
343:
339:
335:
331:
328:
324:
320:
316:
315:Tokyo Charter
312:
308:
304:
300:
296:
291:
289:
285:
281:
277:
273:
269:
265:
261:
257:
253:
249:
245:
240:
237:
233:
229:
225:
221:
213:
208:
204:
202:
198:
193:
192:
186:
184:
180:
175:
173:
169:
165:
161:
157:
153:
146:
142:
137:
133:
131:
126:
123:
118:
115:
111:
105:
102:
95:
90:
88:
84:
73:
71:
70:
65:
64:
59:
58:
52:
50:
46:
42:
37:
35:
31:
27:
21:
16:
1524:, retrieved
1519:
1503:
1494:
1488:
1479:
1438:
1424:
1405:
1400:
1372:
1366:
1337:
1326:
1303:
1297:
1269:
1262:
1244:
1239:
1224:
1209:
1176:
1167:
1162:
1139:
1133:
1110:
1105:
1082:
1076:
1057:
1051:
1039:
1016:
1010:
987:
981:
956:
950:
945:
925:
902:
896:
876:
869:
860:
859:
855:
854:
840:
817:
811:
798:
793:
785:
778:. Retrieved
768:
757:
737:
714:
694:
663:the original
650:
644:
596:Roerich Pact
561:
551:
547:
514:
498:
485:
477:
449:
446:
427:
410:
394:
384:
380:
376:
366:
360:
354:
341:
325:or specific
311:Tokyo Trials
292:
241:
217:
201:World War II
197:belligerents
190:
187:
182:
176:
171:
158:when German
150:
127:
119:
113:
109:
107:
103:
96:
92:
79:
67:
61:
55:
53:
38:
28:, including
23:
15:
883:, from the
780:23 February
526:urban areas
501:laws of war
319:Pacific War
152:World War I
87:bombardment
63:distinction
1550:Law of war
1539:Categories
1526:25 October
1459:References
1346:. p.
1277:. p.
730:References
517:Protocol I
451:A fortiori
383:, and the
272:Stalingrad
45:Protocol I
18:See also:
846:Routledge
515:In 1977,
390:total war
365:. In its
327:customary
307:war crime
260:Rotterdam
252:Chongqing
160:Zeppelins
1469:Archived
1446:Archived
1250:Archived
1144:Springer
722:Archived
570:See also
556:gave an
533:and the
405:San Remo
323:positive
268:Coventry
220:Guernica
143:bombing
936:at the
907:Ashgate
748:at the
705:at the
685:at the
478:updated
280:Dresden
276:Hamburg
224:Durango
147:in 1914
1412:
1388:
1354:
1314:
1285:
1150:
1121:
1093:
1064:
1027:
998:
913:
828:
295:Allies
264:London
256:Warsaw
212:Warsaw
145:Warsaw
66:, and
617:Notes
284:Tokyo
1528:2016
1410:ISBN
1386:ISBN
1352:ISBN
1312:ISBN
1283:ISBN
1148:ISBN
1119:ISBN
1091:ISBN
1062:ISBN
1025:ISBN
996:ISBN
911:ISBN
826:ISBN
782:2021
552:The
379:and
334:Axis
222:and
177:The
112:and
43:and
1382:817
1348:335
1279:213
887:'s
655:doi
443::
431:, (
403:in
359:in
199:of
1541::
1384:.
1376:.
1350:.
1342:.
1306:.
1281:.
1273:.
1191:^
1142:.
1113:.
1085:.
1019:.
990:.
966:^
905:.
872:.
820:.
801:.
784:.
709:,
671:^
651:38
649:.
643:.
625:^
416:,
286:,
282:,
278:,
274:,
270:,
266:,
262:,
258:,
254:,
60:,
36:.
1432:.
1418:.
1394:.
1360:.
1320:.
1291:.
1245:"
1156:.
1127:.
1099:.
1070:.
1033:.
1004:.
919:.
853:'
848:.
834:.
657::
490:)
486:(
480:.
424:.
Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License. Additional terms may apply.
